As I have said before I am a UK Sox fan whose baseball knowledge is ever in need of improvement, so forgive me if the answer to this seems obvious. Reading many threads about players or possible trade targets certain positions such a 1b and RF are often associated with being positions you put or want power hitters. Is that because those positions are relatively easier to play so a less mobile power hitter is 'safer' in those positions? Indeed does it matter, if a first baseman is a good contact hitter but lacks power is that as bad thing, will it hinder his chances of making it at MLB level?

44 minutes ago, Chimpton said:

As I have said before I am a UK Sox fan whose baseball knowledge is ever in need of improvement, so forgive me if the answer to this seems obvious. Reading many threads about players or possible trade targets certain positions such a 1b and RF are often associated with being positions you put or want power hitters. Is that because those positions are relatively easier to play so a less mobile power hitter is 'safer' in those positions? Indeed does it matter, if a first baseman is a good contact hitter but lacks power is that as bad thing, will it hinder his chances of making it at MLB level?

Yes, SS/CF/C are the hardest positions to play. Because only a fraction of MLB players can capably play those positions defensively, the offensive threshold for being viable at those positions is lower. 1B/LF/RF are the easiest positions to play, so the offensive threshold for being viable at those positions is higher.

Tim Anderson's offensive numbers make him an All-Star shortstop, but if the only position he could play was 1B, his offense would be nothing special.

The traditional theory is "power at the corners" meaning your 1st & 3rd Basemen should ideally be 25+ homer guys and RF also should be a guy who can hit homers and have a strong arm if possible. LF is typically your worst fielder, and in many cases is your biggest player outside of 1B because the ball is easiest to track in LF and the CF can cheat that side of field to help cover ground and make up for lack of speed by the LF. Examples of awesome LF bombers bombers are Eloy, Judge and Schwarber. You may have seen some people on this site really down on Moncada this year for not having much power at third. That is not ideal, but his defense and OBP are so good its has offset the lack of power. This team still needs power in RF, but Sheets is ideal against Right handed hitters, so a platoon with A healthy Engel may be very good if they don't make a trade.

Thanks guys, your answers make sense to me now, and helps explain why Eloy is in LF.

1 hour ago, EloyJenkins said:

The traditional theory is "power at the corners" meaning your 1st & 3rd Basemen should ideally be 25+ homer guys and RF also should be a guy who can hit homers and have a strong arm if possible. LF is typically your worst fielder, and in many cases is your biggest player outside of 1B because the ball is easiest to track in LF and the CF can cheat that side of field to help cover ground and make up for lack of speed by the LF. Examples of awesome LF bombers bombers are Eloy, Judge and Schwarber. You may have seen some people on this site really down on Moncada this year for not having much power at third. That is not ideal, but his defense and OBP are so good its has offset the lack of power. This team still needs power in RF, but Sheets is ideal against Right handed hitters, so a platoon with A healthy Engel may be very good if they don't make a trade.

To add on to this, RF requires a stronger throwing arm than LF or CF. Similarly, 3B requires a stronger throwing arm than 1B.

So, if a big hitter/mediocre fielder lacks a strong throwing arm, in the OF he'll more likely be put into LF rather than RF; if an IFer, he'll be put at 1st rather than 3rd.

Also, in general, for RF and 3B, defense is more important than at LF or 1B (though NOT as important in the centre of the field, such as at CF, SS, 2B, or C).

As an aside, congrats to 3 lions for how well you've done in the Euros.

Edited July 28, 20214 yr by Two-Gun Pete

11 minutes ago, Two-Gun Pete said:

To add on to this, RF requires a stronger throwing arm than LF or CF. Similarly, 3B requires a stronger throwing arm than 1B.

So, if a big hitter/mediocre fielder lacks a strong throwing arm, in the OF he'll more likely be put into LF rather than RF; if an IFer, he'll be put at 1st rather than 3rd.

Also, in general, for RF and 3B, defense is more important than at LF or 1B (though NOT as important in the centre of the field, such as at CF, SS, 2B, or C).

As an aside, congrats to 3 lions for how well you've done in the Euros.

Thanks, it was a shame England didn't win the final but penalties are always a lottery!

3 hours ago, Chimpton said:

As I have said before I am a UK Sox fan whose baseball knowledge is ever in need of improvement, so forgive me if the answer to this seems obvious. Reading many threads about players or possible trade targets certain positions such a 1b and RF are often associated with being positions you put or want power hitters. Is that because those positions are relatively easier to play so a less mobile power hitter is 'safer' in those positions? Indeed does it matter, if a first baseman is a good contact hitter but lacks power is that as bad thing, will it hinder his chances of making it at MLB level?

As an Italian (now living in the US) it took me a bit to understand these things. Keep asking questions 

 

Also... sorry about England (not really).

I'll try to rank the positions in order of relative defensive to offense importance.   

Catcher is a unique position as an outsider can't see everything that's involved as it includes game planning, working with the pitchers psyche, monitoring defensive positioning. 

Second base is very challenging to play as you are often going to your right to throw to your left, (including the double play turn)

It's only in recent years that we've seen so much power out of shortstop.  

"You need to be strong up the middle": 1.Catcher; 2.shortstop; 3.second base; 4.centerfield; 5.third base; 6.right field; 7.left field; 8.first base  

When the computers rank WAR, (wins above replacement), the numbers are within each position not against the whole league.

And you may understand already but the stronger throwing arm being in RF relates to potentially having to make a throw to third.  The throw to third from RF much greater distance than from left.  If the fielder in right has a poor arm, doubles could  become triples.

1 hour ago, gogosox1959 said:

I'll try to rank the positions in order of relative defensive to offense importance.   

Catcher is a unique position as an outsider can't see everything that's involved as it includes game planning, working with the pitchers psyche, monitoring defensive positioning. 

Second base is very challenging to play as you are often going to your right to throw to your left, (including the double play turn)

It's only in recent years that we've seen so much power out of shortstop.  

"You need to be strong up the middle": 1.Catcher; 2.shortstop; 3.second base; 4.centerfield; 5.third base; 6.right field; 7.left field; 8.first base  

When the computers rank WAR, (wins above replacement), the numbers are within each position not against the whole league.

Therefore...if Zavala could hit he would be worth a fortune.

Yes, Zavala would be very well paid if he could hit.   Yas is so well thought of, in baseball - not so much on soxtalk, because he can defend and hit.

When Zavala was called up, TLR specifically mentioned game planning and working with pitchers.  Without publicly criticizing him, I took this is as an explanation why Yermin wasn't allowed to catch or be recalled. 

Everything else has been mostly said about the power position characteristics.  I’ll only toss in that ideally you want a lefty at first base because the glove hand is in the hole to increase range. And you want a big target there. Gavin Sheets was almost created in a lab to play first base.

While lefties are preferred at first:  Frank, Paulie, Jose, weren't.  The big problem with Vaughn at 1st; he's only 6'0". 

Anyone else think that he looks like a prototypical catcher: powerful, strong legs, not too tall.   He also seems smart based upon his adaptability and Cal-Berkley

Edited July 28, 20214 yr by gogosox1959
added missing word

38 minutes ago, gogosox1959 said:

Yes, Zavala would be very well paid if he could hit.   Yas is so well thought of, in baseball - not so much on soxtalk, because he can defend and hit.

When Zavala was called up, TLR specifically mentioned game planning and working with pitchers.  Without publicly criticizing him, I took this is as an explanation why Yermin wasn't allowed to catch or be recalled. 

I thought Yermin was also bad at catching?

I don't think that Yermin "looked" that bad catching during spring training.    I think the unseen factors is why he never wasn't given games.

6 minutes ago, Chimpton said:

I thought Yermin was also bad at catching?

Yep. Passed balls and inaccurate throws.

28 minutes ago, Chimpton said:

I thought Yermin was also bad at catching?

Yeah...you could even see that across the pond.